Intriguing developments

Discuss anything ZDoom-related that doesn't fall into one of the other categories.

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Phobus » Sun Jul 25, 2010 3:21 pm

Excellent - an age old dream realised. This does of course mean that they will take a lot more processing with the new trees to traverse, but in limited use, it'll be very good!
User avatar
Phobus
Registered Occasional Lurker
 
Joined: 05 May 2005
Location: London

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby NeuralStunner » Sun Jul 25, 2010 3:45 pm

Phobus wrote:This does of course mean that they will take a lot more processing with the new trees to traverse, but in limited use, it'll be very good!
This brings up another thought: As a consideration to those with lower-end systems, would it be possible to include a CVar to disable the dynamic segs? As it wouldn't be of any benefit to them for polyobjects that didn't cause any trouble before. (Presumably, anyone with that bare a syastem couldn't be playing any overly complex mods in the first place.)

I guess the new code may be too far integrated at this point, and that may be a "no".
User avatar
NeuralStunner
Cuddly but Packin'
 
 
 
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Location: Indiana, USA
Discord: NeuralStunner#1293

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby randi » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:10 pm

I think you overestimate the amount of time needed for such a minimal node building.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Zippy » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:14 pm

Considering building all the nodes fresh for huge maps is usually pretty dang quick to begin with, it wouldn't surprise me that intelligent, dynamic node building is minimal enough to not add much excess processing. As long as it's not polynuts.wad or whatever...

... actually, would that even be that bad? The map doesn't have a lot of nodes to begin with...
User avatar
Zippy
Your Golden Boy
 
Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Location: New Jersey
Discord: Zurock#4834

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Gez » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:19 pm

Unless it has been changed for UDMF, there's still a hard limit of 256 polyobjects per map, isn't there? Since it's the angle value that's used to enumerate them, and it's a value between 0 and 255... A PolyNuts.wad map would have to contain 10617 polyobjects to be worthy of the name. :P
Gez
 
 
 
Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby NeuralStunner » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:24 pm

randy wrote:I think you overestimate the amount of time needed for such a minimal node building.
Probably. :biggrin:

Gez wrote:Since it's the angle value that's used to enumerate them, and it's a value between 0 and 255...
I thought the Angle property ranged from 0-359? In UDMF at least, "angle=90;" results in a north-facing Thing.
User avatar
NeuralStunner
Cuddly but Packin'
 
 
 
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Location: Indiana, USA
Discord: NeuralStunner#1293

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Gez » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:31 pm

It uses byte angle values...
Gez
 
 
 
Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby NeuralStunner » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:37 pm

Is the real angle just converted to a byte later, then? :?
User avatar
NeuralStunner
Cuddly but Packin'
 
 
 
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Location: Indiana, USA
Discord: NeuralStunner#1293

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby randi » Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:50 pm

No, it's regular degrees. The angle field of a map thing is two bytes to accommodate that.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby randi » Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:35 am

Since the BSP-ed polyobjects are in trunk, here's the map I used to test with if you want to try them out quickly. (It's for Hexen.) Hitting +use anywhere will start and stop the polyobject motion.

Edit: Get the updated version of the map from the news post.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Demolisher » Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:53 am

Out of curiosity, what is the garbled mess next to the polyobjects?
User avatar
Demolisher
Never enough time.
 
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Location: Clarkston, MI

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby randi » Sun Aug 01, 2010 9:59 am

You mean the polyobject behind you?

Also, if you aren't compiling your own binaries, this is only available starting with revision 2480. If you're using something older, it won't look right.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Kinsie » Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:41 am

zuzma wrote:Oh hay guiz
Image

Damn 3D floors in software look awesome! :D
Are these built the same way as GZ's floors?
User avatar
Kinsie
A Concept Utterly Obsolete
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Location: MAP33
Discord: Find Me...
Twitch ID: thekinsie

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby zuzma » Sun Aug 01, 2010 1:06 pm

Yup, it's the same as GZDoom.
zuzma
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2004

Re: Intriguing developments

Postby Hirogen2 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:06 am

The Ultimate DooMer wrote:2-sided polyobjects already exist, you just can't jump on them while they're moving (or you get thrown off :p)

Not necessarily. kzdoom5.wad (or was it 4 or 6?) has 2-sided PO ceiling "fans" in the start area (with STEP1 texture IIRC). Usually you can step right in (not on), and nothing happens. Given the right angle, the player is nudged a bit, though still not completely thrown off.
User avatar
Hirogen2
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Central Germany

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kinsie, simploo and 1 guest